Tuesday, November 17, 2015

However western governments choose to handle migration, the governments need to look like they are in control of the situation. This certainly hasn’t been the case in Europe.

Flat out refusal, and the repatriation and dispersal of potential enemy elements already in country is the simplest and most likely method to succeed, but the political viability of this remains uncertain for now.

Whatever number of refugees Western governments choose to accept, it needs to be in a distributed, non permanent way. Any migrants need to be spread thin throughout the country. And there has to be a plan for sending them home as the conflict ends.

Preventing and breaking up enclaves is key. If you expect any sort of assimilation, it will only happen outside of ethnic and religious conclaves.

In lieu of trying to integrate refugees into the country or to turn them away, they could simply be sent to a third party. Paying countries to take in and support the refugees is one way to handle things and still look good. You reduce the potential for Paris-style attacks in your own country. You also don’t look like a horrible villain to the bleeding hearts. It works on a tactical and moral level. This of course takes lots of money, but as Lind states, money is one of the state’s most powerful 4th generation assets.

Fighting ISIS in the Middle East

While Lind touches on fighting 4th Generation war in western countries, the main focus of the book is on fighting wars in the Middle East, or wherever non-state actors are likely to come into play.

The first question that has to be asked are what are our goals in fighting ISIS in the Middle East. These are the ones I identify:

Elimination of ISIS control over state functions over large parts of the Middle East.

Establishment of peace across Syria and Iraq

Establishment of stability across Syria and Iraq through state power.

Currently, ISIS wants to operate like a state that uses traditional warfare to accomplish its military goals. When ISIS tries to take an area, it rolls in with force and asserts control. In many ways they function like a 3rd Generation force, because they are highly mobile but lack the communications to have the overarching control of Western army commanders. Of course they lack training and skills to exercise precision and tactical excellence like well-trained Western armies. Their advantage is their adaptability.

Also, make no mistake, ISIS’s plan is likely to fall back into a 4th Generation insurgency model should the West come to occupy the areas now held by ISIS.

Unlike the resort to airstrikes, his plan has the benefit of not being guaranteed to fail. However, given the increasing number of U.S. state governors who are rejecting the Obama administration's demand that they take in more refugees, to say nothing of the total rejection of the Hungarian and Polish governments, I think the refusal-and-repatriation option is much more politically viable than most Western governments want to admit.

It is, in fact, so politically viable that every government that claims it is not is going to be removed from power within the next five years. Even the mainstream media is beginning to understand that.

Isil and its death cult stablemates will never be defeated until we get to grips with the concept that this has nothing to do with anything except the fact that we exist. It is that, and that alone, which offends them and which they seek to destroy.

So, unless we are all happy to sign up to radical Islam right now, with every heretic and infidel executed on sight, every man forced to take up arms, every woman enslaved, every homosexual stoned to death and every nine-year-old girl at risk of rape, in a terrifying return to the Dark Ages, we have a choice to make.

That choice is stark: kill or be killed. So which one is it going to be?

The single most important thing to understand is that ISIS can't be defeated over there before it is defeated over here. Until the Reconquista 2.0 begins, the Western politicians are doing little more than trying to buy time until retirement.

61 Comments:

I think the refusal-and-repatriation option is much more politically viable than most Western governments want to admit.

Viable? It'd be wildly popular.

Who's against it?

* The SJW left, which has some sort of weird BDSM fetish for submitting to shouty bearded brown men who want to kill them.

* The political and media establishment.

* The poop-handed goat-botherers themselves.

Who's for it?

* About 400 million Europeans.

The only things stopping the Great Fuck-Offening so far are the inertia and incumbency of the political and media classes. And that most Europeans are still catching on to the fact that there is no alternative.

But the direction of political travel is clear. European governments are running out of road to kick this particular can down. The public is losing patience.

The koran-fondlers have made a terrible mistake in confusing the common decency and restraint of Johnny European for weakness.

I have to re-read my Lind, I don't remember him being a rehash of COIN or Stability and Support Operations. Establishment of Peace and Stability are problematic here, its no different than the current COIN strategy and requires a colonial power or serious buy in by the locals (which never really happened in Iraq or Afghanistan) and infinite patience, presence and money. We're not going to beat anything unless we do war like we did it in WWII (the last time we won something). I would caveat that Algeria 57-59 was a good model, but the French left and Algeria is what it is now.

I have to re-read my Lind, I don't remember him being a rehash of COIN or Stability and Support Operations.

You do, because you clearly don't understand his position. He would support the Husseins and Assads of their world, not drive them out and then try to win hearts and minds. His whole point is that the West cannot do anything over there but help support one of them.

He's basically talking about a voluntary request by the Levant for the west to recolonize them in everyone's self-interest. Not a bad idea, but you know that it's too simple for likes of the US and France. And Turkey for that matter.

"The idea of paying someone else to take them is entirely appealing. Who needs cash??

Cuba.Argentina."

Probably the one industry that needs to be outsourced, and a flood of indignation from places like the Beltway soon to follow. Penteconters on their way to the ballot box can't row themselves after all, and so many estate lawns will just continue to grow with no end in sight.

I understand his position, I just wasn't being thorough. "Once the light infantry have degraded ISIS and made their lives difficult, the Baathist Syrian government, the Peshmerga and the Iraqi government will have an edge over ISIS and can make gains against them." - is exactly what we're doing now. We're killing the TB/HIG/HQN leadership (within reach, we don't go into PK) to disrupt the ops, create leadership vacuums, halts in INS operations due to lack of leadership, etc, with the express hope that our SF guys can get enough of the ANSOF (Afghan National SOF) trained and deployed to do this on their own. The problem is that ANSOF won't do it on their own unless our SOF will tag along (extremely hard to get permission to do that, takes a 2-star to say yes) and the regular forces either run or cut deals with the insurgents so they don't get their heads cut off or blown up at a checkpoint. Which is why I'm saying you have to have serious buy in. The gov't here (GIROA) and the Iraqi government when we were there never took their own self defense seriously, they cried and got us to do most of the fighting and buy all the weapons and ammo. But anyway, I could email you offline and give you a white paper on what's really going on, since I'm here in the middle of it.

People on Facebook are posting stuff complaining about all the media attention in Paris instead of giving equal attention to other bad things in the world. Saying stuff like "White lives are always more valued and that's the problem."

Basically they are blaming the victims for being White. What is good rhetoric against this?

Anti-jihadists, anti-sjws will in the near future develop tools that take the resistance to the next level, since the current situation of living in a surveillance state, pushed by traitorous media, will become unbearable. The incentives to just go along is gone, as this option means more alienation, lowered standard of living etc.

Afghanistan is the Langley / Foggy Bottom model, not the SF model. Instead of identifying and supporting local leaders that are sympatico, they have raised up puppets who the populace despises and attempted to make them leaders by virtue of money and direct military support. When that support goes away or declines, so does any local acquiescence with the puppet govt/forces. It is a model guaranteed to fail.

When I saw it, especially coming from White people, I was a bit shocked at how callous they are. How throughly they spit in the face of their ancestors and their children's future. I wanted to say something to that effect but your response is better, made me think about it in a different way. Thanks

It's a very good review (in fact I need to get my own tacked up) and an excellent analysis. However, I respectfully disagree with this portion.

The second effect is to goad the West into attempting a 2nd generation war in Syria where ISIS hopes to turn a certain loss on the physical level into a victory on the moral level. Standing tall against the imperialist infidel crusaders and all plays well on Al-Jazeera. The ultimate hope is to trigger blundering, decade spanning campaigns like Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Caliphate has measurable metrics for failure

1.The Caliph must maintain physical territory in which to impose sharia. Take that away and he loses all legitimacy.

2. The Caliphate must expand that territory. Always. This is in fact the real cause of ISIS launching external terrorist operations. They appear to have petered out on a military level and it is hurting their recruitment. Last year at this time they were getting 3,000 recruits a day. Now they only have 50 or 60 a day straggling in. It is clearly already creating a crisis of legitimacy for the Caliph.

Okay that one is weird but it is unique to the Caliphate. Bear with me.

The Salafist version of the apocalypse goes something like this. The armies of the Caliph defeats the armies Rome on the Plains of Dabiq. The Caliphate then proceeds to sweep all before them until in Eastern Iran a (sort of) Anti-Christ arises; the Dajjal. The Dajjal will hammer the Caliphate until there are only 5,000 of the faithful remaining hold up in Jerusalem. Just as the Dajjal is about to destroy them, Jesus Christ will return to Earth and spear him.

Why the Prince of Peace and not Mohammed, you ask? Well you better not ask because the answer upsets Muslims. This version of the End of Days predates Islam by quite a bit. Islam itself most likely started as just another Gnostic Christian heresy. It’s all there when you look at it. The rejection of the divinity of Christ. Rejection of the Resurrection. Rejection of the Trinity. All of these are explicitly rejected by both Gnostic doctrine and the Koran. The earliest known depiction of Mohammed is a sixth century coin found in Palestine. On one the side are the words the Prophet Mohammed on the other is a sketch of a man holding a cross. Consequently it’s Christ who returns to Earth to slay the Dajjal.

It's all fraud. Who are ISIS selling oil to? Who delivers their mail and spare parts, food, consumables. Who are their internet service providers etc. etc. etc. If they can't be bank accounts frozen. defunded and shut down in 4 weeks, its because no-one is trying.And false flags/ terrorism has nothing to do with it. Islam is offensive because it's wrong. You don't need a reason to hate it. A reason muddies the water.

"Isil and its death cult stablemates will never be defeated until we get to grips with the concept that this has nothing to do with anything except the fact that we exist. It is that, and that alone, which offends them and which they seek to destroy.

So, unless we are all happy to sign up to radical Islam right now, with every heretic and infidel executed on sight, every man forced to take up arms, every woman enslaved, every homosexual stoned to death and every nine-year-old girl at risk of rape, in a terrifying return to the Dark Ages, we have a choice to make."

Let's be clear about this; not even submission will rescue the West from a permanent state of warfare with Islamic forces.

As soon as you submit to the Sunnis the Shia will be trying to kill you, and vice versa.

As soon as you submit to the moderates, the Wahhabi will be trying to kill you.

As soon as you submit to the Persians, the Arabs will be trying to kill you.

As soon as you submit to the Africans, everyone will be trying to kill you.

Fighting and winning is our only choice. Re-iterating the lesson taught to three-quarters of the world by the British Empire in its hey-day ("Do not fuck with us!") is the only path to victory and thus, peace.

Whatever number of refugees Western governments choose to accept, it needs to be in a distributed, non permanent way. Any migrants need to be spread thin throughout the country.

This is an interesting point, because it makes logical sense: they're less likely to cause trouble if they're not sitting around the refugee campfire griping about not seeing enough white women and egging each other on into violence.

But it's also the last thing that would ever happen. When people fear them, the impulse is to wall them off in some sort of camp for processing in hopes that the bad apples can be kept from their targets until identified. When people don't fear them, splitting up families (and they're all family) and dispersing them throughout a foreign culture would be seen as unconscionably cruel.

I'm not sure dispersal would be effective anymore anyway, thanks to technology. Unless you're going to take away their smart phones and somehow ban them from communicating with each other, they'll all still be sitting around a metaphorical refugee campfire anyway, no matter how many flyover villages you stick them in.

To me the key to winning 4G war is to simply remember that it isn't 4G at all... its 0G. And in 0G... you're talking about population vs population... not army vs army. This is pre-uniform... pre-flag... no way to know who is or isn't a soldier... so... you simply kill them all.

Uniforms and flags were adopted so we wouldn't have to destroy whole civilizations just to win wars.

As the idiot barbarians have shunned these safety measures... their populations are no longer covered by the safeguards these measures offer. And thus... until the jihadists do adopt these measures... the only option is to simply declare total war on all muslims until they do, or until they all gone.

> To me the key to winning 4G war is to simply remember that it isn't 4G at all... its 0G. And in 0G... you're talking about population vs population... not army vs army. This is pre-uniform... pre-flag... no way to know who is or isn't a soldier... so... you simply kill them all.

Yep. That's what it's going to take. I don't like it, but I like them killing all of us a lot less.

However, given the increasing number of U.S. state governors who are rejecting the Obama administration's demand that they take in more refugees, to say nothing of the total rejection of the Hungarian and Polish governments, I think the refusal-and-repatriation option is much more politically viable than most Western governments want to admit.

The mapof those states refusing to permit the jihadists in their land is very encouraging and looks like a proxy for what VDARE calls "The Historic American People".

However, the focus on the jihadis misses the enemy behind the enemy--the globalist state. Per John Robb (via WRSA) they will double down on surveillance/totalitarianism

Do yourself a favor and read on Facebooks DeepFace project too. Whoever gets the thumb drive of that data and releases it into the wild will be a hero of our age. In that, the data on every goddamned globalist government official will exist for us to use against them.

Hmph. I need to complete my reading of Lind, but I'm becoming more and more convinced that the entire concept of "generations" of warfare introduces a false notion of progress. These are simply methods of waging war - insurgency, attrition, and maneuver. Which one you use depends on the conditions.

But yes, in the Middle East, the most palatable solution is likely to be to support a local strong-man. Even MacArthur, in his occupation government of Japan, was very quick to hand the Japanese a provisional constitution and get THEM to run their own government. It's a matter of legitimacy. People will be far more accepting of a government they deem legitimate.

@25 Skylark: That's what Trump has been advocating. He's starting to sound more and more like a credible candidate, as attacking the enemy funding source (i.e. oil) is an excellent application of air and seapower.

"These are simply methods of waging war - insurgency, attrition, and maneuver. Which one you use depends on the conditions."

Don't think of it as "progress". its just change. Change isn't progress. No one is saying war is getting better. Its just how things have changed over time do to new tactics, new strategy, and in response to new tech.

You don't have to support a strongman. You just create a power vacuum so they exhaut themselves beating up on each other instead of you. Over the course of the next 10 years or so... a strong man will start to immerge. Once he does... if he is a problem.. you go back and take him out and make another power vacuum.

It will start out as plush flights on chartered planes, and very nice passenger trains. After they trash those, they'll be on cheap subway-style trains with plastic seats and cargo planes. After they trash those, they'll get boxcars.

And as the repatriation continues, they may very well be begging to get on those...

Hootch - I've mentioned what's going on to a number of people. MIlitary, MI, etc and I'm always taken aback by how little they seem to care about their children. There is a common theme of - not my issue, it's up to them now. The issue seems to be those in their 50's and 60's who really don't give a f*ck.Apologies for anonymous post. I will sort it out!

Currently, ISIS wants to operate like a state that uses traditional warfare to accomplish its military goals. When ISIS tries to take an area, it rolls in with force and asserts control. In many ways they function like a 3rd Generation force, because they are highly mobile but lack the communications to have the overarching control of Western army commanders. Of course they lack training and skills to exercise precision and tactical excellence like well-trained Western armies. Their advantage is their adaptability.

I dispute this entire paragraph. The Islamic State is a state at this point even if the rest of the world doesn't recognize it. They are willing and do use any method of warfare that suits their purposes to secure more people within the Caliphate. When the Islamic State wants to take an area, they don't just roll in force. They prepare the battlespace in some cases years in advance by inserting people in key community positions especially targeting critical infrastructure (power & water). Their communications network is more extensive than you think. Their training and skills are grounded in classic Arab light cavalry tactics but expanded by former Baathists who worked for Saddam, former Syrian military, Georgians and Chechnyans as well. Those personnel would have been trained by Russians (fighting both for and against) in modern warfare, with possibly a sprinkling of US training from more recent defectors to the Caliphate. Their training of new recruits will include all of this, which as you say increases their adaptability. The weakness seen in most Arab armies, probably best explained by LtCol Kratman, is they are lazy. The Islamic State provides carrot (religious motivation) and stick (punishment for the insufficiently loyal) to overcome that laziness. It is not any one of these things that makes the Islamic State so formidable but the combination of all of them together.

Per the NYT article (linked by Drudge) about where Syrian "refugees" are being resettled in the US, may I be among those who suggest that the people who operate and staff the actual agencies (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/orr/resource/voluntary-agencies) placing these "refugees" be placed on notice that they will be held personally responsible for any downstream mayhem committed by their charges?

I'm sick of politicians and their (usually well-paid) henchmen dropping Section 8 or refugee-resettlement hand grenades into neighborhoods & communities and then figuratively walking away. When this antebellum period ends and the time finally arrives to (quoting Mencken) hoist the Jolly Roger and begin slitting throats, the people whose "JOB" it was to inject these toxins into our lives should be Job 1.

If something were to happen to one of my loved ones, I have little doubt that working my way back through the agency list personnel chart would be a key component to my grieving process.

Hell, end the religion all together by bombing Mecca and Medina. Drop in 2000 Marines, plant a bomb on top of the Kaabah and say turn in your weapons in 72 hours or we eliminate Islamic culture. Permanently.

@35: Interesting observation. I've long thought that part of the Brat Boom decade group (don't think of a 20-year generation, you'll get wrong answers) really never gave a damn about anyone but themselves. Hence the popularity of reverse mortgages

@35: I'm squarely in the middle of that group, at 55. And I do find myself caring less and less. Perhaps because I'm in Minneapolis, surrounded by lefties who know better than the knuckle-dragging racist sexist homo hating Republicans, along with the second-largest Somali city in the world (only Mogadishu is larger). They all line up and vote the way Keith Ellison tells them to.

Right now there's a Black Lives Matter Only If They're Ended By A Cop protest going on. Who knows? They might have a point, this time, or they might be wrong again. There's a thousand people who say that the cops shot a guy who was laying on the ground, handcuffed. Of course, no one can find anyone who actually saw this, but they heard it from their cousin who knew a guy who saw it.

Sure, I'll lay in some ammo for The Day the EBT Cards Stop Working. But yeah, I probably won't live to see the collapse. The kids? They're voting for this crap, pretty much. It was nice, here, while it lasted, before the ones who benefited from their parents' sacrifice decided it would make them feel good if they invited the wretched refuse in to share the wealth.

I think the refusal-and-repatriation option is much more politically viable than most Western governments want to admit.

Correct and spot on.

Dear Mr. President,

Our fucking lifeboat is already full, the passengers are fighting each other, food and resources are gone and the boat has sprung several leaks, so don't send any more to be rescued!

(The President Replies)

Dear Selfsh-white-male-person of Faith,

I agree that taking on more may cause your craft to sink, but you'll die knowing that I forced you all to do what I believe is right and the True Christian thing to do! Think how much better I'll feel about myself!

0bama is demanding we immediately take in another 10,000 of these so-called "refugees"...10,00003% = The current estimate of how many of the "refugees" are actually trained jihadis300 = 3% of 10,0008 = How many jihadis just attacked unarmed peaceful people in Paris129 = Death toll in Paris (Would have been much larger if the suicide bombers had succeeded)1032 = Therefore, how many (at a minimum) 300 jihadis would kill here in the USA...Wonder if we could get them to target the Dem Convention?

So, unless we are all happy to sign up to radical Islam right now, with every heretic and infidel executed on sight...

Why do people persist in using the adjective "radical" when describing the problem? Do they really not understand that the "moderates" are heretics and will be dealt with as soon as the infidels are under control?

@42 Nate, I wish I could agree with you here, but I'm not seeing it. Perhaps it depends on age group? Every last White murdered by a Muslim or a Negro (at least every one I've read of at any website in 5 years or so) has had relatives in a rush to "forgive" their loved one's murderer before the body is even cold. No call for repentance, no evil "judging," just "God is love" and Christianity = forgiveness of everything instantly.

France's reaction (barring a few bombs over there) has been flowers, teddy bears, and candles. Lots of emoting and bewilderment, but no anger or thoughts of just revenge. I believe I read of two Irish(?) girls who survived Bataclan by hiding in the basement who said Muslims couldn't be blamed. All the trending hashtags have been oozing with sorrow over the innocent refugees and peaceful Muslims who will be blamed unfairly for the acts of a few "extremists." Did not France's dead have "skin in the game"? I truly see no evidence that they're coming to realize their opinions have been dead wrong. Instead, I see Amy Biehl syndrome writ large.

I'm one of the evil baby-boomer generation (born in '58) and so remember a country that was majority White. My sons, however, despite going to private Christian schools and living in what is considered a preferred suburb, have grown up being one minority among many, and have never known an America that wasn't heavily Indian, Asian, Mexican, and African. We've taught them what we believe, but I'm not certain it seems real to them, because they've never known or lived in such a reality as a homogeneous nation.

@56 Sheila4gEvery last White murdered by a Muslim or a Negro (at least every one I've read of at any website in 5 years or so) has had relatives in a rush to "forgive" their loved one's murderer before the body is even cold.

Sample bias.

I don't know what is the actual percentage, but a plurality of victims of violence clearly set themselves up for it. Those who sleepwalk through life on Condition White are in all likelihood totally immersed in the Prevailing Narrative. It should be no surprise that their surviving relatives spout Prevailing Platitudes. Stupidity, intensity of herding impulse and political blindness are undoubtedly heritable.

This is part of why CCW-holders don't mow down criminals daily. People who actually reject the Narrative are simply likely to avoid the trouble that snares those hypnotized by the Propaganda Machine, kind of like the idiots who walk into open manholes as they furiously text about their new pair of boots.

France's reaction (barring a few bombs over there) has been flowers, teddy bears, and candles.

I saw a comment on one of those badthink sites that said she saw out of 9 people in Paris interviewed by a reporter only 1 was not anti moslem but the reporters stopped asking those people questions.

All the trending hashtags have Twitter shadowbann. Unless you are following someone who practices bad think you will not be able to find out what they say. https://reason.com/archives/2015/10/27/shadow-censorship-on-social-media/1 http://imgur.com/gallery/fqTsfzv https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/32wjss/gamergate_supporters_are_being_shadowbanned_by/

There is already a great housing solution in place for Europe's future astronauts, composers, doctors, and poets. Chinese 'Ghost Cities'. An enormous housing overcapacity in a desperate need for tenants that can afford the rent. Thanks to generous EU grants our betters should be able to colonize empty Chinese apartment buildings in peaceful manner,safe in the knowledge that their new homeland is far, far away from inhospitable, wretched lands of racist Whites.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blogPlease do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.